Fishermen require sharp hooks to properly snare a fish. An existing problem for fishermen occurs when fishing hooks became dull over time and/or from repeated use, causing the fishhook to not properly hook into the back, bony part of a fish's mouth. Consequently, the fish can pull away from the hook and be lost. Previous options to included fishhook sharpeners with a tapered recess but a flat bottom, which can result in the point of the hook hitting the bottom of the tapered recess thereby dulling the hook point. Another option was to use a fishhook sharpener with a “V-shaped” groove.
In addition to the creating, or re-sharpening of conical points on various items needing a needle sharp conical point such as sewing and medical tools, and various fine pointed articles as described herein. One of the primary intended uses for the present invention is the point maintenance of fishhooks. A dull hook is the single biggest reason angler's loose fish. A dull hook won't set in the bony area at the back of the fish's mouth. It can slide forward as you try to set the hook, into the soft front portion of its mouth where the soft tissue can tear and allow the hook to pull out. The results are a lost fish.
The relevant art reviewed all have a common thread running through them that keeps them from hitting the mark. This common thread is choice and use of the wrong materials for the application, and over-complexity of mechanical design. Another fact is that more modern materials and processes are now available to improve the development and design of a device and methods for the creating and sharpening of conical points as described herein. A number of devices have provided fishermen with the ability to sharpen fishing hooks, but lack the tapered sharpener and simplicity of the present invention. Presently known art attempts to address this problem, but has not completely solved the problem.
The following represents a list of known related art:
Reference:Issued to:Date of Issue:U.S. Pat. No. 3,468,068SpruellSep. 23, 1969U.S. Pat. No. 4,991,355GilesFeb. 12, 1991U.S. Pat. No. 2,426,892MayerSep. 2, 1947U.S. Pat. No. 2,766,644MarksOct. 16, 1956U.S. Pat. No. 4,635,406RumbaughJan. 13, 1987U.S. Pat. No. 5,735,071GouldieApr. 7, 1998U.S. Pat. No. 5,172,523KadlecDec. 22, 1992U.S. Pat. No. 5,287,661BennerFeb. 22, 1994U.S. Pat. No. 5,967,888LawhunOct. 19, 1999U.S. Pat. No. 4,852,305JuranitchAug. 1, 1989U.S. Pat. No. 2,657,503GainesNov. 3, 1953
The teachings of each of the above-listed citations (which does not itself incorporate essential material by reference) are herein incorporated by reference. None of the above inventions and patents, taken either singularly or in combination, is seen to describe the instant invention as claimed.
Disadvantages of these prior art point and fishhook sharpeners are the design of how the abrasive surface is presented to the point to be sharpened and the choice of abrasive materials (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 2,426,892 FIGS. 3 AND 4 CROSS SECTIONAL VIEWS 6–6 AND 13–14) as shown in the cross sectional view 6–6 of the tapered recess used to receive the hook point for sharpening. With continued use the tapered recess will shortly abrade into a shape unable to support the sharpening process by allowing the point of the hook to hit the bottom of the tapered recess, thus dulling the hook point. In addition, my tests have concluded that the use of an abrasive material as claimed in this prior art will breakdown very quickly thus preventing the creation of a clean, sharp, crisp point. Prior art (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 2,766,644 FIGS. 3 AND 4) demonstrates how critical material choice is in designing a device to dress, or sharpen, a point on a fishhook or other object. This prior art is using a course file section held in place against a “V” groove creating an inwardly extending slot having a tapered opening in which to place the fishhook point for sharpening. The problem with this design is the course file or abrasive section will create grooves in the fishhook causing stress fractures and failure under load conditions. Additionally, the “V” groove and abrasive plate relationship create a pinch point that will not allow the point to sharpen fully and will pinch, grip, and twist off the thin hook point as it is formed. Also, there is no provision for the expulsion of metal and abrasive particles, and broken tips as they are generated by the hook sharpening device and process, while it is in use, and will further impede the successful sharpening of the fishhook. The use of an abrasive conical socket is demonstrated in (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 3,468,068 FIGS. 1, 2, 3, 5 AND 6) in an attempt to create a method of sharpening a fishhook point. The actual results will be the creation of a dull fishhook. There is nothing in this prior art that prevents the hook point from rubbing on the bottom of the conical socket. Therefore, if a new fishhook were put through the sharpening process using this device it would be duller after the process than before using this device. Additionally, in (FIG. 5) the complexity of design will create very expensive manufacturing costs for the task that it is capable of performing.
Ease of use issues requiring good eye and hand coordination along with a stable platform, can have a negative impact on the results of attempting to sharpen a point on a fishhook without having a proper guide for the hook (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 4,635,406 FIG. 1, ITEMS No. 14 AND 36) showing the interface with the hook and rotating stone having no guide for the fishhook. In addition, there is a safety issue involved with this design whereas the unguarded rotating abrasive stone can cut the fingers of a person holding the fishhook or other object if they slip or misjudge the contact of the object being sharpened and the rotating abrasive slug. As shown in (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 5,735,071 FIG. 1, ITEM 68) an abrasive stone has been attached to the protective cap of this device with the intended use of sharpening a fishhook. Again, the use of this prior art requires a high degree of eye and hand coordination and will not produce a tapered conical point.
Other drawbacks to following the concepts offered in much of the prior art, is the limited ability of these devices to match the manufactured angle of the hook point (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 5,172,523 FIG. 1, ITEMS 10 AND 100) this prior art offers a flat sharpening surface to a conical point, giving limited ability to match the angle of the hook point and can not duplicate the conical point of the hook by sharpening all 360 degrees of the point, thus creating a flat spot on the hook and a spade or shovel point on the hook point, which reduces the hook's ability to easily penetrate the fish's mouth. Another example of this condition is offered in (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 5,287,661 FIGS. 3 AND 5, ITEMS No. 32 AND 14) where it demonstrates that it is not possible to create a conical point with this prior art. At best, a spade shaped point would be generated because of the ability of this device to only contact one tangent point on a flat surface, whereas it creates a flat surface that had previously been a conical tapered surface coming to a sharp point. Additionally, this prior art not having the ability to sharpen one point at a time, any bent hook, not matching the manufactured angle of this device can not be sharpened.
Portability, and ease of use, of a point or fishhook maintenance or sharpening device, is of critical importance to the user when out in the wilds or in a rocking boat fishing. (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 5,967,888 FIG. No. 2 ITEMS 1 AND 10) Shows a device that is not easily portable for in the field sharpening of hooks. This fishhook sharpening device uses a vice like clamping system and a separate sharpening stone, requiring a high degree of eye hand coordination skills and a stable surface to set this device on for use. It is large in size, and unsafe to use in a rocking boat or harsh environments, because of the danger of your hand slipping and being jabbed by the stationary clamped hook point and barb. The apparatus shown in the prior art (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 4,852,305 FIG. Nos. 5, 6, 9, AND 12) also shows a device that is not easily portable for in the field sharpening of hooks. In addition to being a very complicated device, requiring the use of additional tools in order to sharpen a point on a fishhook, Its complexity makes it a very expensive product to manufacture, and if used in a saltwater or damp environment will be subject to rusting and if neglected will shortly become unusable.
Prior art complexity of design and material use are critical elements to consider in today's economy as it relates to manufacturing costs along with the current competitive nature of offshore manufacturing. In the prior art (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 2,657,503 FIG. Nos. 2, 3, AND 8) we are shown a fishhook sharpener device of extreme complexity and yet it cannot dress a conical, tapered point, it can only sharpen one surface area of the hook producing a spade or shovel point. The fact that it is a machined assembly makes the manufacturing costs prohibitive in today's economy. Additionally, if used in a saltwater or damp environment it will be subject to rusting and if neglected will shortly become unusable. The additional prior art (E.G. U.S. Pat. No. 4,991,355 FIG. Nos. 1 THRU 19) Show a device capable of sharpening a conical point, using a reciprocating, rotary, abrasive element battery and motor driven around a stationary held fishhook. This device is another example of a product that is extremely expensive to manufacture. In addition, it requires batteries to operate this device, which adds additional costs to the customer, and if you are out in the field and the batteries go dead you cannot sharpen your fishhooks.
In summary, the reviewed prior art commented on herein, employs designs and materials that limit their application to devices that are marginal at best in there performance, operation, and in some cases useful product life. In other cases the materials available at the time or selected, along with the manufacturing methods chosen, were not a good match for the device, or the design was limited by the knowledge and experience of the inventor. The wrong materials for the application and over complexity of mechanical design for the desired application can make a product undesirable for manufacturing because of cost, or design appearance, and esthetics. The application of state of the art materials, engineering methods and improved manufacturing methods as applied to the present invention, and described herein will overcome the failings of the reviewed prior art, to create an improved design of a device and methods for the creating and sharpening of conical points as described herein.